sdw2001

This article is somewhat off-base in my view.  I'm a classically-trained musician, FYI.  

The reason I say "off base" is that while it's true you can't listen to "lossless" format audio over AirPods, there is almost no one who can hear the difference.  The same applies to this claim:  

....which drops below CD quality when transmitted to wireless headphones

I'd be interested in the technical support for that comment.  And even if technically true, I find it hard to believe that almost any listener can tell the difference between a high quality AAC recording and a CD recording on the same equipment (AirPods).  Now, you will find people who can hear the difference on Hi-Fi equipment (e.g. loudspeakers or reference-quality wired headphones).  

I know for a fact that I have a sensitive ear when it comes to quality.  I can typically hear the difference between compression rates, formats, digital v. analog recordings, etc.  For example, I cannot stand satellite radio with its advertised "near CD quality" audio because the compression drives me nuts.  Having said that, I doubt I could distinguish between lossless vs. high quality lossy formats (all other factors being equal) on AirPods.   

Moreover, the features of AirPods and Apple Music enhance the audio to such a degree that it will be excellent for probably 99% of users, regardless of codec.  So what about the 1%, you ask?  That's the entire point.  Anyone who claims to be that sensitive and discerning is not going to be listening on AirPods at all.  In fact, I'd argue that anyone with that level of discernment will not be listening to classical music on digital formats at all.  We are talking about people who turn their noses up at uncompressed CD audio because of the sample rate.  These are folks who, if anything, listen to DVD-A format on $25,000+ systems...and that's if they have to.  Hi-Fi folks I've encountered prefer laser-guided turntables.  They won't even use integrated receivers.  They spend a lot of time arguing about analog vs. digital, distortion, and double-blind studies.  

spheric said:

maltz said:

Bluetooth audio for speakers/headphones has never been great, but it's often good enough.  Bluetooth audio with headsets/speakerphones/etc, with two-way audio, is HORRIBLE, even just for voice.  This is why many wireless headsets come with proprietary dongles that improve the situation, even if they're capable of straight Bluetooth.  I have no idea why the Bluetooth powers that be have allowed that situation to persist as long as it has.

Get a better headset. The quality is directly dependent upon which codec the manufacturer has implemented, and it varies tremendously between codecs. 

It varies widely, but it's typically price-dependent. At a certain point, Bluetooth isn't going to get better, no matter what codec.  You're still transmitting digital information over wireless.  

$300 for a charger? Let's just stop there. 
 
No. 

godofbiscuits said:

9secondkox2 said:

It’s not a reprisal if your employer tells you to work at the office and you refuse. 

That’s grounds for termination. 

If the job description says remote or temporarily remote, great. Once it shifts back to “on site,” you work on site or lose the job. 

That’s how things work in the real world. 

You do t make up your own job description unless you own the company. 

You shouldn't talk about 'the real world' as if you're accusing Apple employees or others of not knowing what it's like to work in it.  The hours put in, the missed weekends, the missed social time, family time, lost time due to travel back and forth.  The unyielding company towards you, but the company expecting everything from you.  Yeah, that's the real world, and not just at Apple.  But don't even imply that employees are somehow petulant for pushing back against all of that one-sided bullsh*t.

With all due respect, I don’t think you understand the real world, nor the fact that your perspective comes across as exceptionally entitled. I would not be surprised if you are generation Z, or a young millennial. That’s not an attack, just a note about what I’m getting from your statements. Specifically, unyielding? They’re asking employees to come into the office three days per week. That means they are accommodating request for more remote time at least to some degree.   The problem with these employees is that they do not, in fact, work in the real world. At least compared to almost any company I know about. That’s why their complaints sound so ridiculous to most people. The rest of the world went back to five days a week for white-collar professions well over a year ago. The same applies for so-called mitigations like masking. Apple is being exceptionally accommodating. And if the employees don’t agree, they should leave. 

dewme said:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out if the US actually goes through with a ban. There are probably around 100 million TikTok users in the US alone. Any blanket edict that affects that number of users is going to be seen as wildly Authoritarian and overreaching. It’s along the same lines as the EU threatening to ban iPhones if Apple doesn’t comply with their edicts. I believe Apple sells around 100 million phones a year in the EU. 

These Authoritarian threats are being waved around by what are actually a very small number of individuals who feel emboldened by their positions of authority. But in most cases these people and groups are completely ignoring the preferences and choices held by hundreds of millions of people who would be impacted by the power plays being conducted by these small Authoritarian rule makers. 

Does anyone think that 100 million EU residents would simply let themselves be forced to purchase a POS Android phone if the iPhone was “banned” by a small group of Authoritarians, many of whom are elected? I don’t see that happening. But of course Apple isn’t going to test those waters and will succumb to the Authoritarians living out their best lives/fantasies as big bad power players. 

I don't agree that politicians pushing a ban are "authoritarian," nor do I agree with comparing them to the actual authoritarians in the EU who seek to mandate USB-C and possibly ban the iPhone.  

TikTok is a national security threat.  It is a serious threat to our youth.  You have a company with deep ties to the CCP.  The Western version of TikTok uses algorithms that push users towards sex, drugs, etc.  Meanwhile, the Chinese version algorithms push positive and productive content (organized dance, national pride, etc.).   User data is being collected in droves and obviously is accessed by the CCP.  The CCP is getting detailed user data on hundreds of millions of people.  Their goal is to eventually supplant the U.S. as the global superpower, with the intermediate goal of usurping us (and our alliances) in their sphere.   

Now, I'm not making the argument to ban it per se. However,  I certainly understand the argument to do so.  Obviously, a ban on a such a popular app would be major and virtually unprecedented step.  I don't know exactly how it would be implemented, either.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  I don know there is bipartisan support for it.